Today Tasos echoed something I have been saying for years. Something that always brings out the screaming themepark fans who just cannot see how games function without them.

Instances are there to help the developers, not the players.

Tasos says, roughly,

"On instances let me just say, we never had them, we don't have them, and we might never have them. They don't agree with our philosphy for a massively multiplayer game. ... We want player interaction to be at the major possible level and we don't want to limit it by instancing. Instancing is really not in our DNA...We don't want to take away from that. We don't like the instances, and if we ever do go to any form of instancing, it will be to improve our user experience, and not because they are more convenient to us. Because usually instance are used for technical reasons, for convenience of the developer."

I've always aid that instances are band aids for poor game design. Developers that rely on instancing do so because they can't figure out how to make a balanced MMO without it.

If you took instances out of WoW it would fall apart. EQ suffered without instances (in terms of camping rare spawns, not general leveling. General leveling flourished without instancing).

However, DAoC functioned perfectly without instances. I never waited in line for a mob spawn. Nobody ever stole my kills (which I always found to be a dumb objection anyway, because if someone were to go about stealing your kills, they could do it in the public zones just as easily)

If a dev adds instancing, it's because its sooo much easier to half ass a game and plop instances in, than think about an MMO as en entire ecosystem. Most MMOs are becoming a collection of side games all stapled together, seperated by instances. They are no longer big cohesive units.

I'm glad to see that Aventurine, one of the only companies that sees instances for what they are, a crutch, is also one of the ONLY MMO companies to GROW after launch in the last 8 years,

If used perfectly instances can aid a mmo more than hurt it.

I think Guild Wars 2 does it the way I would say perfectly fits the nature of instances. If you want story elements in your mmo add them.

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Today Tasos echoed something I have been saying for years. Something that always brings out the screaming themepark fans who just cannot see how games function without them.

Instances are there to help the developers, not the players.

 

Tasos says, roughly,

"On instances let me just say, we never had them, we don't have them, and we might never have them. They don't agree with our philosphy for a massively multiplayer game. ... We want player interaction to be at the major possible level and we don't want to limit it by instancing. Instancing is really not in our DNA...We don't want to take away from that. We don't like the instances, and if we ever do go to any form of instancing, it will be to improve our user experience, and not because they are more convenient to us. Because usually instance are used for technical reasons, for convenience of the developer."

 

I've always aid that instances are band aids for poor game design. Developers that rely on instancing do so because they can't figure out how to make a balanced MMO without it.

If you took instances out of WoW it would fall apart. EQ suffered without instances (in terms of camping rare spawns, not general leveling. General leveling flourished without instancing).

However, DAoC functioned perfectly without instances. I never waited in line for a mob spawn. Nobody ever stole my kills (which I always found to be a dumb objection anyway, because if someone were to go about stealing your kills, they could do it in the public zones just as easily)

 

If a dev adds instancing, it's because its sooo much easier to half ass a game and plop instances in, than think about an MMO as en entire ecosystem. Most MMOs are becoming a collection of side games all stapled together, seperated by instances. They are no longer big cohesive units.

 

I'm glad to see that Aventurine, one of the only companies that sees instances for what they are, a crutch, is also one of the ONLY MMO companies to GROW after launch in the last 8 years,

 

 Well said my friend!

Ofc he says that, what else can he do seeing has his first game pretty much only had that aspect to save it from it self (and if i gather the feedback on these forums it did not do that very well either) the man i smart enough to know his market. It is a bit like when the makers of Rift did that whoke "this is not Azeroth" thing.

But then again i seem to remmeber the same sort of buzz for DF 1 and that did not turn out so well (again according to the lovley crowd on Mmorpg) but if it will shut a part of the sandbox crowd that have not had their itch scratched since UO up i am fairly happy with that.

Just be careful of the hypetrain, it will only let you down.

Originally posted by Flex1

If used perfectly instances can aid a mmo more than hurt it.

 

I think Guild Wars 2 does it the way I would say perfectly fits the nature of instances. If you want story elements in your mmo add them.

But story elements are almost universally done poorly in MMOs. They do not mesh well with the rest of the game. Once you leave the instance in GW2 all that story is gone and none of the things you did in the instance reflect upon the real world.

I will say that GW2 is more convservative with their instances, much more so than other MMOs. I can actually tolerate GW2 whereas WoW and AoC are just unberably instanced. They use it to cut off every aspect of the game.

I feel like putting singleplayer storylines is just a huge waste of resources. A better story can be told using players in the game world.

Originally posted by tawess

Ofc he says that, what else can he do seeing has his first game pretty much only had that aspect to save it from it self (and if i gather the feedback on these forums it did not do that very well either) the man i smart enough to know his market. It is a bit like when the makers of Rift did that whoke "this is not Azeroth" thing.

 

But then again i seem to remmeber the same sort of buzz for DF 1 and that did not turn out so well (again according to the lovley crowd on Mmorpg) but if it will shut a part of the sandbox crowd that have not had their itch scratched since UO up i am fairly happy with that.

 

Just be careful of the hypetrain, it will only let you down.

The MMORPG crowd was always hypercritical in regards to Darkfall. Pre release they derailed every single thread screaming "VAPORWARE!" When the game turned out to be real they collectively went out of their way to bash every aspect of the game, despite it being obvious that they hadn't played it.

In reality, Darkfall did quite well for itself. Aventurine went from 20 devs to currently having 60 devs. They moved into a bigger building, opened a second server, completed 3 free expansions, and are now about to relaunch the game. It's a much better success story than just about every AAA WoW clone of the last 8 years.

Originally posted by karmath
Say what you will about AV, but no one can fault them for actualy trying to do something different and stick to their guns.

One of the reasons the game was developed so many times was because every publisher that approached them tried to get them to add in instances and take out full loot. They stuck to their vision.

Well on the other hand a good chunk of the fans of DF were pretty hypersensitive to anythink but praise for the game too.

Now i personally have no opinion either way, i left the type of PvP enviorment after UO having had my fill of "bandit" players and gank-trains. But i have to agree that Aventurine seems to have learnt a lot from DF on what to do and what to not do and if they can deliver it will be a very nice game.

Still not something for me but a nice game non the less.

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Today Tasos echoed something I have been saying for years. Something that always brings out the screaming themepark fans who just cannot see how games function without them.

Instances are there to help the developers, not the players.

 

Tasos says, roughly,

"On instances let me just say, we never had them, we don't have them, and we might never have them. They don't agree with our philosphy for a massively multiplayer game. ... We want player interaction to be at the major possible level and we don't want to limit it by instancing. Instancing is really not in our DNA...We don't want to take away from that. We don't like the instances, and if we ever do go to any form of instancing, it will be to improve our user experience, and not because they are more convenient to us. Because usually instance are used for technical reasons, for convenience of the developer."

 

I've always aid that instances are band aids for poor game design. Developers that rely on instancing do so because they can't figure out how to make a balanced MMO without it.

If you took instances out of WoW it would fall apart. EQ suffered without instances (in terms of camping rare spawns, not general leveling. General leveling flourished without instancing).

However, DAoC functioned perfectly without instances. I never waited in line for a mob spawn. Nobody ever stole my kills (which I always found to be a dumb objection anyway, because if someone were to go about stealing your kills, they could do it in the public zones just as easily)

 

If a dev adds instancing, it's because its sooo much easier to half ass a game and plop instances in, than think about an MMO as en entire ecosystem. Most MMOs are becoming a collection of side games all stapled together, seperated by instances. They are no longer big cohesive units.

 

I'm glad to see that Aventurine, one of the only companies that sees instances for what they are, a crutch, is also one of the ONLY MMO companies to GROW after launch in the last 8 years,

 

I agree 100% with Tasos, and yourself, and would even if DF didn't exist and Tasos was involved in some completely different game.

I didn't like Instances (for the stated reasons and more) when they were first introduced as a major gameplay element (giving everyone their own "private slice" of the game world), and I've liked them even less as their influence and use has spread and increased since.

They are one of the major elements that has reduced MMORPG Worlds down to merely "games".

Originally posted by ezpz77
I recall AV "getting it" when the first game was in the making too. On paper, they get it and say all the right buzzwords to get the bittervet sandbox crowd excited. If memory servers, what they delivered was QUITE different from what they were talking about. I'm as excited as the next bittervet at the prospect of having a half-decent sandbox to play, but given AV's history, I'm going to take the wait and see approach with UW.

After the latest interview, and looking back at the original DF, the dev's have a very different idea for DF than what the community has in mind.   I think we all want an MMORPG, but they only wanted DF to be a PvP arena.  Looking at the game from that perspective makes every design choice they made fit perfectly.

Originally posted by thinktank001

Originally posted by ezpz77
I recall AV "getting it" when the first game was in the making too. On paper, they get it and say all the right buzzwords to get the bittervet sandbox crowd excited. If memory servers, what they delivered was QUITE different from what they were talking about. I'm as excited as the next bittervet at the prospect of having a half-decent sandbox to play, but given AV's history, I'm going to take the wait and see approach with UW.

 

After the latest interview, and looking back at the original DF, the dev's have a very different idea for DF than what the community has in mind.   I think we all want an MMORPG, but they only wanted DF to be a PvP arena.  Looking at the game from that perspective makes every design choice they made fit perfectly.

or money and man power would make the choices make since too the more complex the game is the more time needed to code it

Originally posted by Flex1

If used perfectly instances can aid a mmo more than hurt it.

 

I think Guild Wars 2 does it the way I would say perfectly fits the nature of instances. If you want story elements in your mmo add them.

Sorry but i prefer games in which the playerbase writes the story of the game and not some Dev.

Turns out to be much more fun and years later you still talk about your old stories

Originally posted by Purutzil
I disagree. Instances in its biggest form make it possible to provide challenge to the player that would otherwise provide zerg, case in point GW2 zone events trivializing anything that stands as a challenge.

What? Makes no sense. Most games got rid of death penalties = zerg. And no newer game offers challenge, these new modern so called mmorpg's basicaly throw everything in your lap and you dont have to put forth effort to accomplish anything. Older games had challenges and no instances. Instances dont make challenge, hell I have soloed many instances by myself and provided no challenge at all.

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Tasos says, roughly,

"On instances let me just say, we never had them, we don't have them, and we might never have them. They don't agree with our philosphy for a massively multiplayer game. ... We want player interaction to be at the major possible level and we don't want to limit it by instancing. Instancing is really not in our DNA...We don't want to take away from that. We don't like the instances, and if we ever do go to any form of instancing, it will be to improve our user experience, and not because they are more convenient to us. Because usually instance are used for technical reasons, for convenience of the developer."

Wait wait...

So are you paraphrasing, or are you directly quoting?  "Roughly" doesn't work with direct quotes ( which " " is intended to indicate.)

It's important because direct quotes depend only on accurate transcription, not the integrity of the heresay second-hand reporter.

The rest of your post seems to consist of RAWR YER SO RIGHT ME TOO! fawning, so...  (<---that is paraphrasing, of course)

Gamers and Appeal to Authority arguments--either Devs are holy men, delivering Truth with a capital "T" from high atop the mount, or they're blithering idiots who never get a damned thing right, ever.  Which spin we attach seems to vary almost hourly, but here on mmorpg.com we tend to favor the 'blithering idiots' POV, at least a majority of the time.